Transportation Resilience: Adaptation to Climate Change (2016)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

20 t r a n s p o r t a t i o n r e s i l i e n c e tered to provide a meaningful foundation for the needed delivery of services. Recognizing the need for a multitude of resources (including engineering services, materials, contractors, and equipment), the STA has created and maintained a one-stop shopping list. There is initial difficulty in establishing contact with some employees, and some employees experience a 3-month separation from their homes. The STA emergency transportation informa- tion system is initially inoperable, but Google reaches out to jointly set up a system for real-time mapping of closed roads, with public updates twice daily. Incident control centers are operated by a unified command that sets priorities, provides overall management, and takes the lead on communication and public informa- tion. The state Secretary’s Office provides direction to the unified command. Jacobs noted that the postevent or demobiliza- tion phase is sometimes referred to as the “forgot- ten phase” in emergency management. She suggested it was important to conduct postevent reviews and to make improvements based on those reviews. She commented that if roads and rivers compete for the same space, the river will end up winning eventually. She said that improvements to stream crossings had been made in response to floods in the state. These improvements included increasing hydraulic capacity, sediment transport capacity, and aquatic organism passages. Jacobs described the 2002 and 2013 floods in Cen- tral Europe as other examples supporting the scenario. She reported that flood maps and flood risk manage- ment plans were developed in Germany after the 2002 floods, and that the experiences in 2002 helped to pre- vent and/or reduce costs and damage in 2013. There were still disruptions to road traffic during the 2013 flood, however. The Nationale Hochwasserschutz- programm (NHWSP; National High Water Protection Program) was launched in the aftermath of the 2013 flood. Measures such as strengthening of levees were taken by the German states. Jacobs described some of the potential implications for research from this scenario that she thought the breakout groups could discuss. One topic was con- sidering the implications for future adaptation plan- ning and resourcing. A second topic was examining the combined impacts on the transport and river sys- tems. A third topic was assessing the robustness of present climate model estimates for use in justifying major investments. A fourth topic was identifying methods to communicate the message that flooding will become more common in some parts of Europe and the United States to help with improving commu- nity preparedness. breaKout grouP a Alan O’Connor Challenges • One challenge discussed by the participants focused on the risks associated with incorrectly pricing some activities, such as locating commercial and residential developments in flood plains. One approach to managing this issue discussed by some participants was requiring benefit–cost analyses prior to any development approvals. The use of green infra- structure was identified as a possible approach for address- ing some of these concerns. Enhancing the coordination of the land use and transport decision-making processes was also suggested as a way to address these concerns. • A few participants discussed transport challenges associated with managing the response to extreme weather events. They suggested that coastal flooding may be considered part of normal operations in some areas. The need to change thinking in these areas was discussed. • Other challenges focused on coordinating the evacuation process, including evacuation orders, routes, and supporting services. One participant noted that some people may choose to shelter in place rather than evacuate. Another suggested that a better understanding of human behavior during extreme weather events was needed to plan appropriate evacuation strategies. • The use of real-time data to monitor conditions during extreme events was also an issue. It was sug- gested that decisions should be based on a combination of expert opinion and real-time data. • The reliability of communication methods may be a challenge during an extreme weather event. The impor- tance of multiple communication methods was stressed by some participants, including the use of new technologies. • Participants discussed possible privacy concerns with the use of social media and other related technologies. The potential for third-party groups, such as insurance compa- nies, to assist with communication strategies was suggested by some participants. The potential to provide incentives for people to make desired travel choices was also discussed. • In some cases the best long-term approach may be to abandon roads that continually flood. It was noted that making these types of decisions is not easy and is politically very sensitive. Research • Examining agency interaction and coordination during extreme weather events is one area of research that could be very beneficial. It was suggested that pro- viding case studies that highlighted good examples of